The stunning reversal came after it was determined that board member William Emanuel had a conflict of interest when he voted with the 3-2 majority last December in a case known as Hy-Brand Industrial Contractors Ltd. that nullified the expanded joint employer standard the NLRB adopted in 2015 involving Browning-Ferris Industries of California.

NAHB had lauded the December ruling by the NLRB, noting that it would ensure a level playing field for all small businesses.

Browning-Ferris is challenging NLRB’s 2015 decision to expand the definition of joint employer in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit. In 2016, NAHB and its coalition partners filed an amicus brief in support of Browning-Ferris.

Today’s decision by the NLRB reinstates the expanded definition of joint employer. This definition is so broad and vague that an employer could be held liable for the labor and employment practices of independent contractors and subcontractors over which they have no direct control.

NAHB continues to seek a legislative solution that will provide businesses clarity and certainty regarding the joint employer rule by restoring the traditional definition of joint employment in which a company must exercise “direct and immediate control” over a worker in a business-to-business relationship.

We continue to urge the Senate to swiftly approve the Save Local Business Act, bipartisan legislation that has already been passed by the House. This will provide a more permanent legislative fix that codifies this standard under both the National Labor Relations and Fair Labor Standards acts.